[femiagbabiaka]

You're right, and after thinking about it a bit more, I think this TOS is actually more confusing than what came before. Saying explicitly that, e.g. MIT licensed software was allowed (because that license is approved by OSI), makes it unambiguous. This feels like if someone complained or had too many repos they're liable to get nuked from orbit. That being said Forgejo is FLOSS and this service is hosted for free so they're allowed to set whatever terms they want. I'll delete my upthread comment as it's misinfo.

[bradly]

No problem. I'm confused by it as well. I migrated a repo that is more source available than open source and didn't realize that it probably is against ToS until afterwards.